Outrage in Stanford Rape Case Over Light Sentence for Attacker and Stmt by His Father

[glenn1]

Either it contributed, in which case it does excuse his actions at least some since contributing to the crime would mean that they participated in it, that is what contribute means, or it didn't in which case we don't have to excuse his actions in the slightest.

It was not a contributing factor, it was a prerequisite factor. It is no surprise that for the crime to be committed there had to be opportunity to commit the crime.

A better explanation than I provided, thanks.

 

[Darwin333]

I've already conceded that the consensus is, that that particular concept is too complicated and detrimental to lady brains..

Kind of like the concept of "don't fuck women that are passed out" is evidently too complicated and detrimental to men?

No, that doesn't excuse what he did. Okay? He was a bad guy. Okay? He was drunk, she was passed out. They both made mistakes. His life is forever ruined, she gets to be a "victim" and reaps all the benefits of said designation.

Wait, did you just use him as being drunk as an excuse?

And WTF is wrong with you? What "benefits" does she get to reap being after being sexually assaulted? Oooh, she gets to go to support groups, counselors and psychologists to try and get over it for years and potentially much longer, what a great benefit!

He could run into a burning building today, and save five children from a certain death, and it still wouldn't erase that one mistake, on that one drunken night.

There's something wrong with THAT picture.

Many years ago, there was this concept known as "paying your debt to society". It usually involves some jail time, and then he got out, and he had a clean slate, and you have an opportunity to do something different, something better, to make a positive impact on those around you.

Sadly, those days are way back in the mist.

Jesus wept.

While I don't always agree with the sex offender list, besides having to notify his neighbors how is that much worse than having to check "yes" in the have you ever been convicted of a felony and then writing "2 counts of sexual assault" on the line below on every application?

Also it doesn't seem like you fully understand this, you do know that the only reason he didn't actually rape the girl was that he got caught before he had the opportunity?

 

[jackstar7]

Nevermind.

 

[Viper1j]

And WTF is wrong with you? What "benefits" does she get to reap being after being sexually assaulted? Oooh, she gets to go to support groups, counselors and psychologists to try and get over it for years and potentially much longer, what a great benefit!

Oh Did you not know about the $10,000.00 from the "Victim's fund" she received? Yeah She might have gone to one or two "counseling sessions" for show, but I could show you crime scene photos and rape kit photos of torn/ripped anal cavities, broken jaws, lacerations, and in the most extreme case.. autopsies.

Maybe that would put a fingering comparison in some kind of perspective for you.

While I don't always agree with the sex offender list, besides having to notify his neighbors how is that much worse than having to check "yes" in the have you ever been convicted of a felony and then writing "2 counts of sexual assault" on the line below on every application??

Did you not know you only have to check that box for 7 years? (5 in some states.)

He will carry that scarlet letter until the day he dies. Think that's the same thing do you?

 

[jackstar7]

Oh Did you not know about the $10,000.00 from the "Victim's fund" she received? Yeah She might have gone to one or two "counseling sessions" for show, but I could show you crime scene photos and rape kit photos of torn/ripped anal cavities, broken jaws, lacerations, and in the most extreme case.. autopsies.

Maybe that would put a fingering comparison in some kind of perspective for you.

Did you not know you only have to check that box for 7 years? (5 in some states.)

He will carry that scarlet letter until the day he dies. Think that's the same thing do you?

You're the most obvious person I've seen with this jealousy of actual victims.

You should figure that shit out.

 

[Darwin333]

Oh Did you not know about the $10,000.00 from the "Victim's fund" she received? Yeah She might have gone to one or two "counseling sessions" for show, but I could show you crime scene photos and rape kit photos of torn/ripped anal cavities, broken jaws, lacerations, and in the most extreme case.. autopsies.

Maybe that would put a fingering comparison in some kind of perspective for you.

So because he didn't get a chance to rip her anal cavity she isn't really a victim. Have you ever been a victim of sexual assault? I'm starting to assume so because you seem to know all about the mental impact that an attack such as this has on a person.

And no, I didn't realize that she received $100K for a victims fund (why would you " " that?) but I've never heard of such a thing but there is no way this poor girls goal was any sort of gain.

Did you not know you only have to check that box for 7 years? (5 in some states.)

He will carry that scarlet letter until the day he dies. Think that's the same thing do you?

No, I didn't realize that but since he only got 6 months, of which he probably only served 2 or at the most 3) I think it's fair but I would give him the option of taking the sentence that the prosecutor asked for, or hell lets call it 2/3 of what they asked for, and in return he won't have to register as a sex offender. That seems fair to me, how about you?

 

[mikeymikec]

Oh Did you not know about the $10,000.00 from the "Victim's fund" she received? Yeah She might have gone to one or two "counseling sessions" for show, but I could show you crime scene photos and rape kit photos of torn/ripped anal cavities, broken jaws, lacerations, and in the most extreme case.. autopsies.

Maybe that would put a fingering comparison in some kind of perspective for you.

So now your argument is "for that kind of money she should have been sexually assaulted far more brutally", while still ignoring all the facts presented to you and making up assertions about the victim as you go along while advocating that Brock Turner is the real victim here. Wow.

I think you need to talk to your family about this.

 

[jackstar7]

I think you need to talk to your family about this.

I think a mental health professional would be advisable as well.

 

[Darwin333]

So now your argument is "for that kind of money she should have been sexually assaulted far more brutally", while still ignoring all the facts presented to you and making up assertions about the victim as you go along while advocating that Brock Turner is the real victim here. Wow.

I think you need to talk to your family about this.

Like I said in a previous post, I'm thinking that he was sexually assaulted far more brutally by some guy and he didn't get a fat check so now he's pissed at the victim.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Contributory negligence on the part of someone who gets passed out drunk. It doesn't excuse his actions in the slightest but we can't ignore complete irresponsibility on the part of victims either.

No no no no - That only applies while driving. Get your double standards straight.

I don't understand why this is such a difficult topic to come to an agreement on though.

If the person has garbled speech and is unable to give a competent answer to anything you say, do you still think it's okay to fuck? No
If the person is passed out, do you still think it's okay to fuck? No.

 

[jackstar7]

No no no no - That only applies while driving. Get your double standards straight.

I don't understand why this is such a difficult topic to come to an agreement on though.

If the person has garbled speech and is unable to give a competent answer to anything you say, do you still think it's okay to fuck? No
If the person is passed out, do you still think it's okay to fuck? No.

Now what if she'd passed out due to issues with diabetes/blood sugar? Same feelings about her irresponsibility?

Just curious to know which impairments help you shift blame to victims.

 

[mikeymikec]

Now what if she'd passed out due to issues with diabetes/blood sugar? Same feelings about her irresponsibility?

Just curious to know which impairments help you shift blame to victims.

I think you've got the wrong end of the stick. Or I have. I'd say "his stick", but that might result in juvenile humour, and that's something I'd never partake in.

Or maybe I'm the one who's confused.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Now what if she'd passed out due to issues with diabetes/blood sugar? Same feelings about her irresponsibility?

Just curious to know which impairments help you shift blame to victims.

So you're saying (if someone is drinking) that if they get into a moving vehicle and drive - and wreck - that "they don't have some of the blame"?

You can't have it both ways. You can't go around saying drinking and driving is entirely on the person drinking.

And you have to understand that there is a CLEAR CUT difference between a rape and "OH god I woke up next to some douchebag that I fucked and I feel so bad about it therefore rape".

On that same token though you need to have some responsibility for the situations you put yourself in. I'm not doing the whole "Well you shouldn't dress slutty" bit - but my point being is that everyone should do everything possible to prevent or discourage a crime from occurring.

For example, staple 3000 $100 bills to your clothing and go walk around south Chicago. Tell me how it goes and whose fault it is.

 

[mikeymikec]

If one puts themselves in a position where they constitute a great risk to others (ie. the injury/death of others) without being in full possession of their faculties, like getting behind the wheel of a car, deciding to take up firearms practice or they're Superman so therefore going out on the piss is a supremely bad idea, then yes, they're abusing a position of significant responsibility.

An average person going out on the piss and passing out is not inherently a great risk to others. Yes, going out on the piss to the point of passing out is a bad idea and showing poor personal responsibility, but it hardly registers on the scale when sexual assault of some type of placed on the other side of the scale. Is that something we agree on? Apart from viper1j, obviously.

 

[glenn1]

If one puts themselves in a position where they constitute a great risk to others (ie. the injury/death of others) without being in full possession of their faculties, like getting behind the wheel of a car, deciding to take up firearms practice or they're Superman so therefore going out on the piss is a supremely bad idea, then yes, they're abusing a position of significant responsibility.

An average person going out on the piss and passing out is not inherently a great risk to others. Yes, going out on the piss to the point of passing out is a bad idea and showing poor personal responsibility, but it hardly registers on the scale when sexual assault of some type of placed on the other side of the scale. Is that something we agree on? Apart from viper1j, obviously.

There are two different actors at play here (there could be more given situation) and the actions of both can be considered independently. One can fairly say "it was irresponsible of you to get blackout drunk" while still holding accountable someone who took advantage (criminally, morally, or in other ways) of the person in that state. While people screaming "victim blaming" do have a point that much more than a cursory look at the actions of the victim is rarely productive, it also shouldn't serve as an absolute shield from any criticism whatsoever of their actions and it certainly can and should inform public policy and perhaps how laws are written (the example of "what if both people are drunk and thus cannot be said to give complete and voluntary consent" is a good thought experiment).

 

[jackstar7]

So you're saying (if someone is drinking) that if they get into a moving vehicle and drive - and wreck - that "they don't have some of the blame"?

You can't have it both ways. You can't go around saying drinking and driving is entirely on the person drinking.

And you have to understand that there is a CLEAR CUT difference between a rape and "OH god I woke up next to some douchebag that I fucked and I feel so bad about it therefore rape".

On that same token though you need to have some responsibility for the situations you put yourself in. I'm not doing the whole "Well you shouldn't dress slutty" bit - but my point being is that everyone should do everything possible to prevent or discourage a crime from occurring.

For example, staple 3000 $100 bills to your clothing and go walk around south Chicago. Tell me how it goes and whose fault it is.

Noticed that you didn't answer my question.

 

[jackstar7]

There are two different actors at play here (there could be more given situation) and the actions of both can be considered independently. One can fairly say "it was irresponsible of you to get blackout drunk" while still holding accountable someone who took advantage (criminally, morally, or in other ways) of the person in that state. While people screaming "victim blaming" do have a point that much more than a cursory look at the actions of the victim is rarely productive, it also shouldn't serve as an absolute shield from any criticism whatsoever of their actions and it certainly can and should inform public policy and perhaps how laws are written (the example of "what if both people are drunk and thus cannot be said to give complete and voluntary consent" is a good thought experiment).

"rarely productive" is an incredible phrase in this context.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Noticed that you didn't answer my question.

I didn't answer because it was a stupid question. Of course you have no responsibility for something you are unable to prevent.

 

[glenn1]

I didn't answer because it was a stupid question. Of course you have no responsibility for something you are unable to prevent.

So terrorists came and forced alcohol down the victim's throat until she passed out? That's terrible that she was "unable to prevent" becoming drunk.

 

[jackstar7]

I didn't answer because it was a stupid question. Of course you have no responsibility for something you are unable to prevent.

So people with diabetes don't manage their sugar/insulin?

You probably should have said you don't know anything about this.

 

[jackstar7]

I'm just trying to get at the % of blame you want to push onto victims.

It's fascinating reading.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

So terrorists came and forced alcohol down the victim's throat until she passed out? That's terrible that she was "unable to prevent" becoming drunk.

I have no clue where you're trying to go with this - or how this connects with anything I've said that far....

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

So people with diabetes don't manage their sugar/insulin?

You probably should have said you don't know anything about this.

I've had seizures from forgetting to take a medicine - One is the voluntary CONSUMPTION of alcohol, the other is forgettingof something - e.g. forgetting to bring insulin, etc... Happens all the time - especially when I have to travel.

 

[sactoking]

I think it's pretty clear: if you're a woman who gets drunk and ends up being sexually assaulted it's your own fault.

Just like if you're a teenage boy who enters into a high school football locker room and ends up being sodomized it's your own fault.

http://www.espn.com/espn/feature/story/_/id/17507010/otl-investigation-trend-sodomy-hazing

 

[jackstar7]

I've had seizures from forgetting to take a medicine - One is the voluntary CONSUMPTION of alcohol, the other is forgettingof something - e.g. forgetting to bring insulin, etc... Happens all the time - especially when I have to travel.

Sounds like you weren't being responsible...